Because I really think they are and I think it should be based on radio play. There have been some good #1s that were deserving of the top spot that were downloaded the most on i-tunes those would be songs like Sexyback, Gold Digger, We Belong Together, Ridin (I think it was #1 on i-tunes), Run It, Hips Don't Lie, S.O.S., So Sick, etc. But then there are those other songs that were #1 on i-tunes but they didn't deserve the top spot on the billboard charts like Laffy Taffy, Check On It, London Bridge, Do I Make You Proud, etc. Then there are those songs that deserved to be #1 but weren't because of I-tunes those songs are NE-YO - Sexy Love, T.I. - What You Know, Rihanna - Unfaithful, Chris Brown - Yo (Excuse Me Miss), etc. So those would be the reasons why I think i-tunes are ruining the billboard charts but what do you guys think?

No. Just because you may or may not like a song that achieved a certain level of success, that doesn't mean the current method is inaccurate when it comes to America's taste.

Yes, sales may have not been such an important factor from 2001 to 2005 but before that, sales and airplay have worked side by side in determining chart positions for God knows how long (I forgot, actually).

OK so that unnecessarily long paragraph is just to say that Billboards should be based on a sometimes biased and always overweight lady in a radio station rather than the fans who are actually buying the music?

No, I don't Agree.

BTW, is it a fact that iTunes has influence on the Billboards? I think they might be seperate charts all together. It's not like Radioplay & Downloads mixed in one chart.

What You Know DID hit 1 on iTunes but only got to 3 on Billboard

What You Know - T.I?
That song has had the longest replay history in my entire music collection, and I'm hardly into hip/hop|rap. Something about it, but I can't quite tell what exactly, just damn catchy.

I don't know. I like it because some songs deserve to be in the top 10, and I think if people are willing to buy your song legally, then that should be displayed. What I don't like is how it makes some songs look like flops. You could be in the top 10 pop or urban or rhythmic, and it won't even seem like it.

Yeah that is true but then again, if you let Music Charts manipulate your preference in any way you're not a true fan of music but more a bandwagon jumper.

The Billboard Hot 100 should be based on only mainstream (CHR/pop) radio and digital sales.

Thanks god those songs missed the top spot. Rap/R&B domination is over. Nowadays, to have a n.1 song you have to have a good song that public will love.

I think iTunes is ruining Billboard. People can buy multiple copies of a single/album quickly which isn't an accurate representation of the public's general view. Whew...

Quite the opposite actually. I think they've improved it on so many levels. Some decent songs have actually gotten to number one, some that wouldn't have had a chance before.

And besides, regardless of people buying multiple copies of singles on iTunes, they're still a more valid representation of what people actually want. I mean, what radio *****s is rarely based on what people want, it's more based on the DJ's and or individual stations want to be hot at the moment.

How is that fair? Besides, there's a whole other chart for that: Pop 100.

The Pop 100 is a BILLION times better than the Hot 100. That should have been the official chart from the start.

Look at the #1's of 2005 and 2006 from the Pop 100:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pop_100...2005_%28USA%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pop_100...2006_%28USA%29

The Pop 100 chart as a whole looks a HELLA lot more accurate than the Hot 100. Crappy Urban songs make top 10 because of FVCKING rhythmic radio. Didn't rhythmic radio used to play tons of DANCE music? What happened?

Just because you prefer pop music, and that you like the pop 100 better doesn't mean it should be the official chart. There are many people that prefer rhythmic radio to pop radio, in fact... rhythmic radio gets more audience per spin than pop radio... Hot 100 reflects POPULARITY, and rap and hip hop has in fact become fairly prevalent in today's music world whether you like it or not.

Besides, digital sales have almost offset the prevalence of urban songs on the Hot 100, and they no longer hog the top spots from very worthy non-urban songs.

Who's the idiot that buys more than 1 copy of a song/album? Even when you lose songs iTunes will give it back to you. I don't see why anyone would buy more than 1 copy.

Fanatacism.

I think ITunes is NOT ruining billboard (with the exception of awful songs like Check On It, London Bridge and the extremely overrated Sexyback)

It's a double-edged weapon. It could be useful for songs that you expect the radio won't play them. while they're pretty popular between the internet fans [Digital buyers] and do justice for these songs. It could be pretty harmful when some songs like "Check On It" hit the #1. It also ,like someone mentioned above could make songs look like flops. Just because artists can have their peak shot one day and fall the next day.

I don't think it's ruining the charts ,but I feel like it shouldn't have that huge impact on the chart. like Jojo's or Fergie's jump.

I agree album sales are down because people buy the digital singles instead of the albums. Also, I don't like it when songs that have very little or no airplay cracking the top 10 or top 20 just because of their sales. I think airplay should be equal to sales, instead of having the sales represent 2/3 of the chart.

It would be nice if Rhythmic went back to being more varied.